Quote:
Originally posted by mysticelt:
Putting aside the male/female issue for a moment, then, how does everyone feel about the ruling about the handicapped golfer who is allowed to use a cart on a non-cart course? Isn't that giving him an advantage similar to a forward tee? 
|
Hello Mysticelt [img]smile.gif[/img] .
Always a touchy one this issue, and I have a feet in both camps. While I like the traditional approach that it is a physical test as well as a skill test (ie all the other players are going to tire more by walking the course for 4 days and tired players = bad shots at the end of the day), I am also dead set against barring someone from competing on the skill grounds of a medical disability that only limits their walking.
The advantage that Casey Martin is getting by using the cart is in terms of freshness at the end of the round. If a guys medical condition limits his walking AND taxes his strength during the round then I believe there is absolutely no competitive advantage (because they have rules proscribing his use of the cart to protect against other potential advantages - ie no roof even if it rains - a limit on driving forward to inspect the lay of the land etc). Is this as much advantage as a forward tee - no, I really don't think so - maybe a couple of feet per hole [img]smile.gif[/img] .
In the Casey Martin case "I feel" that he probably gets a minor advantage in freshness at the end of a round because his physical conditioning is good and I suspect his small amount of walking doesn't tire him out. "I would say this was about" 1/3 of a shot over a 4 round tournament on 75% of the field (not a third of a shot per round and no advantage over the fitter athletes). How do you compare stamina and mental toughness? My estimate is entirely subjective and is only "my estimate".
So the short answer is that I think he should be allowed to compete, even though I am not entirely happy about all aspects.